A national survey in 2022-2023 examined public attitudes towards administrative burdens in U.S. safety-net programs. While racial identity and explicit prejudice did not significantly affect support for burdensome policies, racial resentment, when combined with traditional values, increased support among non-Hispanic White respondents. Those recognizing disproportionate effects on disadvantaged groups favored less burdensome alternatives. Other factors included personal empathy, administrative capability, political affiliation, and program experience, revealing a complex interplay of race, attitudes, and policy support.
Safety-net programs often fail to reach all eligible Americans due to administrative burdens that disproportionately affect marginalized groups. We conducted a national survey to investigate the influence of race on public attitudes towards administrative burdens in Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Our findings revealed that while racial identity and prejudice did not significantly impact support for burdensome policies, racial resentment was associated with increased support for such policies among non-Hispanic White respondents. Conversely, individuals who believed burdens disproportionately affected historically disadvantaged groups favored less burdensome alternatives. This research sheds light on the complex interplay of race, racial perceptions, and administrative burdens in the U.S. social safety net.
The accessibility of safety-net programs like Medicaid and SNAP is hindered by administrative burdens, leading to concerns about equity. We conducted a national survey to examine public perceptions of the acceptability of administrative burdens imposed by states when implementing these programs, with a particular focus on the role of race in shaping these considerations.
Methods:
Our data was collected from a national sample of over 4,000 U.S. adults in late 2022 and early 2023. Respondents were presented with information about the impact of administrative burdens on different racial and income groups and were then asked about their preferences for various policy options affecting the burdens associated with Medicaid and SNAP.
Results:
Our study found that racial identity and prejudice were not significant factors in determining support for burdensome policies. However, non-Hispanic White respondents with higher levels of racial resentment were more likely to support policies imposing higher burdens. Additionally, individuals who believed that burdens had disparate effects on historically disadvantaged groups favored less burdensome alternatives. Other factors influencing burden tolerance included personal empathy, the ability to manage administrative tasks, political affiliation, and program experience.
Discussion:
Administrative burdens in safety-net programs are not purely technical details but have significant consequences for access and equity. Our study revealed that race and racial perceptions influence public attitudes toward administrative burdens, albeit in complex ways. Racial resentment, a measure combining traditional values and racial animus, was strongly associated with support for more burdensome policies.
